{
  "id": 5407990,
  "name": "Fred Baber, Trustee, Appellee, v. Erastus Hurst et al., Appellant",
  "name_abbreviation": "Baber v. Hurst",
  "decision_date": "1917-04-16",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "39",
  "last_page": "40",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "205 Ill. App. 39"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ill. App. Ct.",
    "id": 8837,
    "name": "Illinois Appellate Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 29,
    "name_long": "Illinois",
    "name": "Ill."
  },
  "cites_to": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 174,
    "char_count": 2120,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.579,
    "sha256": "c7e766d94f2ef293bdc95fa14c61173af1ed0c0fbc56d3491aa7f4953cf3a467",
    "simhash": "1:694ec2078c03f2bc",
    "word_count": 364
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:46:37.056812+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "Fred Baber, Trustee, Appellee, v. Erastus Hurst et al., Appellant."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Mr. Justice Graves\ndelivered the opinion of the court.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Mr. Justice Graves"
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "S. J. Gee and T. H. Cunningham, for appellant.",
      "W. H. Clinton and O\u2019Hair & Rhoads, for appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "Fred Baber, Trustee, Appellee, v. Erastus Hurst et al., Appellant.\n(Not to be reported in full.)\nAppeal from the Circuit Court of Edgar county; the Hon. John H. Marshall, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the October term, 1916.\nAffirmed.\nOpinion filed April 16, 1917.\nStatement of the Case.\nBill by Fred Baber, trustee, complainant, against Erastus Hurst and others, defendants, to restrain the collection of a certain judgment and to vacate the same. From a decree in favor of the complainant, defendant Hurst appeals.\nAbstract of the Decision.\n1. Appeal and ebbob, \u00a7 852 -\u2014when recital in certificate of evidence in suit in equity is improper. Where a certificate of evidence signed by the trial judge contained a purported order for an appeal reciting that the certificate of evidence should be \u201cpresented\u201d within ninety days, held that such recital was improper and inoperative, in a suit in chancery.\n2. Appeal and ebbob, \u00a7 853*\u2014what is function of certificate of evidence in chancery suit. The sole function of a certificate of evidence in a chancery suit is to truly set forth the evidence offered, rejected, received and considered on the hearing, and any attempt to make it subserve any other purpose is without warrant of law.\n3. Cleeks of cotjets, \u00a7 5*\u2014what clerk required to enter of record in chancery suit. All written motions and the orders made thereon are matters to be entered of record by the clerk in a chancery suit.\n4. Appeal and ebbob, \u00a7 958*\u2014when court of review bound by clerk\u2019s record. A court of review is bound by the clerk\u2019s record of written motions and orders made thereon entered by him on such record.\n5. Appeal and ebbob, \u00a7 862*\u2014when certificate of evidence stricken from record. A certificate of evidence should, on motion, be stricken from the record where it is not filed within the time fixed in the order allowing appeal.\nS. J. Gee and T. H. Cunningham, for appellant.\nW. H. Clinton and O\u2019Hair & Rhoads, for appellee.\nSee Illinois Notes Digest, Vola. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number."
  },
  "file_name": "0039-01",
  "first_page_order": 67,
  "last_page_order": 68
}